Explosive containment devices are high strength pressure vessels used to contain the blast of explosives. Explosive containment devices are available in a number of sizes and are designed in order to meet a specific net explosive weight (NEW) for the items placed within them. Containers are often constructed of heavy walled alloys and may include carbon composites, polymers, and/or other materials in order to contain the blast overpressure and fragmentation associated with the detonation of explosives.
Personnel who work with explosives, or who respond to explosive response operations, often utilize explosive containment devices in order to store and transport explosive materials. Explosive containment devices reduce the risk of injury or death that may occur as the result of an incidental or unintentional detonation. Damage of property is also minimized.
One hazardous explosive that is commonly stored in an explosive containment device is a blasting cap. Blasting caps are highly sensitive explosives used to create an explosive chain reaction in order to detonate a more stable but powerful main charge. Due to their sensitivity, blasting caps demand the highest safety considerations for personnel utilizing them and the explosives within the blasting caps can be powerful enough to sympathetically detonate other explosives within their vicinity if an accidental detonation occurs. Such events have led to serious injury and death.
Blasting cap containment devices that are currently available can weigh in excess of 15 pounds and hold up to ten caps (see, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,347,929). The intent of these devices is to allow the transportation of blasting caps when in the vicinity of main explosives. Situations where this may occur are for teams confined to small boats or teams that transport main explosives and blasting caps within the same vehicle.
Personnel that conduct explosive operations often times transport blasting caps and main explosives within close proximity. The weight and burden of current blasting cap containment devices prevents personnel from carrying these systems for field operations where a small boat or vehicle is not present to transport the current blasting cap containment device. This limitation of the current system prevents tactical teams from using them. The size and weight of the devices as well as their inability to be adapted for explosive breaching operations, where an initiation system is attached, makes them a poor candidate for use.
In addition to transporting blasting caps, explosive ordnance personnel are required to transport enemy blasting caps and other enemy components during battlefield operations. The mission of the explosive ordnance disposal technician is to separate the explosive components of an enemy device in order to render the device safe. These operations consist of explosive ordnance disposal personnel removing blasting caps from bulk explosives as is common with roadside bombs, suicide vests, and other improvised explosive devices. Once the blasting cap is separated from the bulk explosive, the highly sensitive blasting cap is placed away from the bulk explosive in order to prevent a high order detonation. Many times, the explosive ordnance disposal technician explosively disposes of enemy blasting caps or other sensitive components that are unable to be transported back for intelligence gathering purposes. In these instances, potential enemy information is not obtained and an opportunity to collect and analyze the information is lost. This information could have been used in order to obtain fingerprints, DNA samples, lot numbers, and the country of origin, as well as other vital information that could potentially lead investigators to the bomb maker and supporting infrastructure.
Many similarities also exist between the materials that may be used for an explosive containment device, and modifying the configuration to direct explosive gases and fragmentation away from fragile components or personnel. As an example, explosive ordnance personnel routinely utilize explosives in order to disrupt improvised explosive devices (see, for example, U.S. Pat. No. 7,229,735 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,269,725). One drawback to utilizing these tools is that they cause collateral damage to the surrounding area and are unable to be fired from a robot. The ability to reduce the collateral damage of the disruption tools utilizing a combination of materials to direct, diffuse, and absorb the explosive gases and fragmentation would lessen the collateral damage inflicted by these tools and also makes it possible to fire explosive disruption tools from a terrestrial or waterborne response robot.